ArticleBMC medical education2022
Cognitive enhancing supplements and medications in United States Resident Physicians.
Article in BMC medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe use of cognitive-enhancing medications and supplements among healthy adults continues to rise. Limited data exists on their use among resident physicians. Given their highly competitive and stressful lifestyle, we sought to evaluate the prevalence, motivations, and side effects of using cognitive-enhancing supplements and medications among resident physicians at a large United States academic institution.
methodsAn anonymous web-based survey was circulated to resident physicians inquiring about using cognitive-enhancing supplements and medications, as well as personal characteristics such as gender, marital and parental status, medical diagnoses, and medical specialty. Before circulation, we performed a pilot study. Weighted logistic regression analyses estimated the impact of personal characteristics on the probability of using both supplements and medications.
resultsSurvey response rate was 46.4%. Of respondents, 48.6% were female, 45.9% were married, 70.9% were without children, and 67.2% were in a non-surgical medical specialty. Few respondents had a related medical diagnosis, with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder being the most common (7.1%). Male, non-married, surgical residents were more likely to take supplements (odds ratio (OR) = 1.06, 1.05, and 1.05). Males, without children, and those who felt pressure to perform well, were afraid of being left behind, felt pressure because colleagues take them, or felt they could not reach their current level of training without medications were more likely to take medications (OR = 1.11, 1.04, 1.05, and 1.08). Adverse effects with medications were common.
conclusionSupplement and medication use for cognitive enhancement was high among resident physicians at a single institution despite few having a related medical diagnosis. This study raises awareness of the growing pressure in competitive residency environments to use cognitive enhancement regardless of the potential side effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.